Romans 2:22

2:22 do you use items stolen from pagan temples? Old Testament law prohibited Jews from having anything to do with pagan idols (see Deut 7:26), but first-century Jews did not strictly follow this law. Sometimes they stole idols and used or sold the precious metals.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom 2:22 . βδελυσσόμενος properly expresses physical repulsion: thou that shrinkest in horror from idols. Cf. Dan 9:27 , Mar 13:14 . ἱεροσυλεῖς : dost thou rob temples, and so, for the sake of gain, come in contact with abominations without misgiving? This is the meaning, and not, Dost thou rob the temple, by keeping back the temple dues? as has been suggested. The crime of ἱεροσυλία is referred to in Act 19:37 , and according to Josephus, Ant. , iv., 8, 10, it was expressly forbidden to the Jews: μὴ συλᾶν ἱερὰ ξενικά , μηδʼ ἂν ἐπωνομασμένον ᾖ τινὶ θεῷ κειμήλιον λαμβάνειν .

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_2:21, Rom_2:22

Thou therefore that teachest another. We have here the virtual apodosis of Rom_2:17. If thou, although a Jew, and related to God as one of his peculiar people, and well instructed out of the law, violate the law, and do the things thou condemnest in others, how canst thou escape the judgment of that God who will render to every man according to his works. It is evident the apostle means to assert that the Jews were guilty of the crimes here specified; and it matters little whether the several classes be read interrogatively or affirmatively. The former, as the more forcible is generally preferred. To set ourselves up as instructors, and yet not to apply our principles to ourselves, is not only an inconsistency, but offensive arrogance and hypocrisy. To steal and to commit adultery are great sins, but for those who preach against them and condemn them in others, to commit them, is to quadruple their guilt. The Jews, therefore, who committed the sins which they so loudly condemned in the heathen, were more guilty in the sight of God than the heathen themselves. While flattering themselves that they were secure from the divine wrath, in the enclosure of the theocracy, they were the special objects of Gods displeasure; so that publicans and harlots were nearer to the kingdom of God than they. Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou rob temples? That the Jews, subsequently to the captivity, did abhor idols, is a well known fact; that they robbed the temples of idols is not known, besides, robbing the temples of idols was not sacrilege; for in the mind of the Jew there was no sacredness in those temples. It was to him robbery, and nothing more; probably something less. The objurgatory character of these several clauses requires that the thing here charged should be of the same name with idolatry, not its opposite. The Jew taught that men should not steal, yet he stole himself; he said, Commit not adultery, yet he was guilty of that crime; he abhorred idols, yet was guilty of idolatry. It is something analogous to idolatry that is here charged, not the despoiling of heathen temples, which would be the natural expression of the abhorrence of idols. The essence of idolatry was profanation of God; of this the Jews were in a high degree guilty. They had made his house a den of thieves. Instead, therefore, of taking the word ἱεροσυλεῖς literally, which the context forbids, it should be understood in a secondary sense. It expresses the sin of irreverence in its higher forms; either as manifested in withholding from God his due, which the prophet denounces as robbery Will a man rob God? yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings, Mal_3:8; or it may be taken in the still more general sense of profanation, the irreverent disregard of God and holy things. This is all the context requires: You profess great reverence for God, in eschewing idolatry; and yet, in other forms, you are guilty of the greatest irreverence.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

thou that abhorrest idols--as the Jews did ever after their captivity, though bent on them before.

dost thou commit sacrilege?--not, as some excellent interpreters, "dost thou rob idol temples?" but more generally, as we take it, "dost thou profane holy things?" (as in Mat 21:12-13, and in other ways).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

22. Thou who abhorrest idols, etc. He fitly compares sacrilege to idolatry, as it is a thing of the same kind; for sacrilege is simply a profanation of the Divine Majesty, a sin not unknown to heathen poets. On this account Ovid (Metamor. 3,) calls Lycurgus sacrilegious for despising the rites of Bacchus; and in his Fasti he calls those sacrilegious hands which violated the majesty of Venus. But as the Gentiles ascribed the majesty of their gods to idols, they only thought it a sacrilege when any one plundered what was dedicated to their temples, in which, as they believed, the whole of religion centered. So at this day, where superstition reigns, and not the word of God, they acknowledge no other kind of sacrilege than the stealing of what belongs to churches, as there is no God but in idols, no religion but in pomp and magnificence.

Now we are here warned, first, not to flatter ourselves and to despise others, when we have performed only some portions of the law, — and, secondly, not to glory in having outward idolatry removed, while we care not to drive away and to eradicate the impiety that lieth hid in our hearts.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(22) Commit sacrilege.—Properly, rob temples—i.e., idol temples, with a pointed antithesis to that abhorrence of idols on which the Jew prided himself. This is certainly the last offence of which we should have expected the Jews of this date to be guilty, knowing the scrupulousness with which they shunned all contact with idolatry. They may, however, have thought the idol temples fair plunder. At any rate, it is clear that this charge was commonly brought against them. Comp. Act_19:37, where the town-clerk of Ephesus specially acquits St. Paul and his companions of “being robbers of temples.” Josephus also (Ant. iv. 8, § 10) quotes as a precept of the Mosaic legislation, “Let no one blaspheme those gods which other cities esteem such; nor may any one steal what belongs to strange temples; nor take away the gifts that are dedicated to any god.”

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. commit sacrilege] Lit. plunder sacred things, or plunder from sacred places. The Gr. word is the same as that translated “robbers of churches,” Act_19:37. The idea of plunder is not necessary in the word, however; other forms of sacrilege may be included. Thus the reference may be to such profanations as that of the traders in the Temple (Joh_2:14, &c.), and the appeal will be, “Thou, who art so jealous for God against idolaters, dost thou worship self and mammon in His presence?” But if the special thought of robbery is kept (as is certainly more natural, with the derivation and usage of the Greek word in view), the reference probably is to Jewish thefts from pagan temples, where meanwhile the strict Jew professed not to dare to set his foot for fear of pollution. Scruple broke down before thievish avarice.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the name of God is blasphemed,.... The being and perfections of God, such as his holiness, omniscience, and omnipotence, are denied, or evil spoken of; and also the law of God, and the forms of worship instituted by him:

among the Gentiles through you: through their iniquities, who when they observe them, conclude that the God of Israel is not omniscient, or he would know, and take notice of these things; and that he is not holy, or he could not bear them; nor omnipotent, or he would revenge them:

as it is written; the passage or passages referred to are not mentioned, but are perhaps Isa 52:5. In the former of these texts the words are, "they that rule over them make them to howl; saith the Lord, and my name continually every day is blasphemed"; which are spoken of the rulers of the people, either of their ecclesiastical or political rulers, or both; and so Aben Ezra interprets them of , "the great men of Israel"; and here by the apostle are applied to their doctors and wise men: and in the latter are these words, "thus saith the Lord God, I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for my holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the Heathen"; that is, by their unbecoming walk and conversation, and especially by the disagreeable conduct of their principal men: and the Jews own the same things, and complain of them in much the "same language the apostle here does, saying, "they disgrace the law before the people of the earth, (the common people, or else the Gentiles,) how? a wise man sits and expounds in the congregation, saying, thou shalt not lend upon usury, and he lends upon usury; he says, thou shalt not commit a robbery, and he commits a robbery; he says, , "thou shalt not steal, and he steals": says R. Berechiah, it happened to one man that his cloak was stolen from him, and he went before the judge about it, and he found it spread upon his bed or couch: and, says the same Rabbi, it happened to a certain man that his pot was stolen from him, and he went before the judge about it, and he found it upon his hearth: hence it is said, "as they were increased they sinned against me, therefore will I change their glory into shame", Hos 4:7 (d).

(d) Debarim Rabba, sect. 2. fol. 236. 2.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?

Ver. 22. Thou that sayest] Hypocrites can talk of religion, as if their tongues did run upon pattens, they are fair professors, but foul sinners; as was that carnal cardinal Cremensis, the pope’s envoy, sent hither, A. D. 1114, to interdict priests’ marriages, and being taken in the act with a common strumpet, he excused it by saying he was no priest himself, but a correcter of them.

Dost thou commit sacrilege?] The chronicler noteth of Queen Mary, that she restored again all ecclesiastical livings assumed to the crown, saying that she set more by the salvation of her own soul than she did by ten kingdoms. Shall not she that abhorred not idols rise up and condemn those that do, and yet commit sacrilege? (Speed’s Chron.)

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Dost thou commit adultery? - There is no doubt that this was a crime very common among the Jews; see the Mat 12:39 note; Joh 8:1-11 notes. The Jewish Talmud accuses some of the most celebrated of their Rabbies, by name, of this vice. (Grotius.) Josephus also gives the same account of the nation.

Thou that abhorrest idols - It was one of the doctrines of their religion to abhor idolatry. This they were everywhere taught in the Old Testament; and this they doubtless inculcated in their teaching. It was impossible that they could recommend idolatry.

Dost thou commit sacrilege? - Sacrilege is the crime of violating or profaning sacred things; or of appropriating to common purposes what has been devoted to the service of religion. In this question, the apostle shows remarkable tact and skill. He could not accuse them of idolatry, for the Jews, after the Babylonish captivity, had never fallen into it. But then, though they had not the form, they might have the spirit of idolatry. That spirit consisted in withholding from the true God what was his due, and bestowing the affections upon something else. This the Jews did by perverting from their proper use the offerings which were designed for his honor; by withholding what he demanded of tithes and offerings; and by devoting to other uses what was devoted to him, and which properly belonged to his service. That this was a common crime among them is apparent from Mal 1:8, Mal 1:12-14; Mal 3:8-9. It is also evident from the New Testament that the temple was in many ways desecrated and profaned in the time of our Saviour; notes, Mat 21:12-13.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Idols, &c. The Jews, at the time of our Saviour, were free from idolatry, to which their ancestors had been so prone for so long a time. But to this evil had succeeded another, scarcely less heinous, viz. sacrilege, and a profanation of holy things. The greater part of the high priests bought their office. The priests permitted in the temple itself a kind of traffic, which caused our Saviour to declare to them, that hey had made the house of his Father a den of thieves. And to favour their own avarice, they taught that it was lawful to defraud their creditors, and refuse to their parents the necessary succour, in the case of vows to give to the temple. St. Paul does not here reproach them for the profanations of the temple which they committed in the last siege of Jerusalem, for it had not then take place; but he knew full will the dispositions of their hearts, and the little regard they had for the most sacred things. (Calmet)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Dost thou commit adultery? to this sin also the Jews were greatly addicted: see Psa 50:18; Jer 5:8.

Dost thou commit sacrilege? Here he varies the crime; he does not say: Dost thou commit idolatry, but sacrilege. The Jews, after their return out of captivity, kept themselves free from idolatry; but it seems they were guilty of a sin that was near akin to it. Here it may be questioned, what the sacrilege was that the Jews were guilty of. Some think, their covetousness is here taxed, which is a kind of idolatry. The Jews took those things which were consecrated to idols, and which, by the law of God, should have been destroyed, and turned them to their private advantage. Others think, that their sacrilege consisted in withholding from God that which they should have consecrated and offered up to him; see 1Sa 2:13; Mal 3:8,9; they converted to their own use such things as were dedicated to God. Much to the same purpose is their opinion, that think it consisted in robbing God of his due. By the imperial law in the code, it is declared sacrilege to take from the emperor any thing that is his; it ought to be much more accounted sacrilege to deal so with God. Some think their sacrilege lay in polluting the worship of God, and making his commands of no effect, through their corrupt additions and traditions.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. Commit adultery—The most celebrated rabbies, such as R. Akiba, Meir, Eleasar, and others, are accused in the Talmud of adultery.

Commit sacrilege—Literally, pillage temples. But as the Jews had but one temple, and their reverence for that was most profound, some difficulty has been felt how to make the charge good. Yet as the temple was frequently enriched with the most splendid gifts of wealthy devotees, such a crime might have been many times committed without being recorded in history. Grotius in fact mentions the notable embezzlement of a large sum of money belonging to the temple by four Jews just before Paul’s writing this epistle.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? The word (ierosuleiv) thus rendered in the Authorized Version means literally "robbest temples," though it may bear also the general meaning of "sacrilege." Commentators differ as to what is meant. Some, considering that the word would not have been used except to denote something really sacrilegious some offence against true sanctity refer it to the withholding of gifts and offerings from the temple at Jerusalem, or of tithes from the priests, or embezzlement of the temple revenues. Mal_3:8, etc., is adduced in illustration, "Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings," etc.. (cf. also Mal_1:7-14) A passage also is quoted from Josephus, "Archaeol.," B. 18, c. 5, where certain Jews are said to have appropriated to their own use purple and gold which had been given to them for the temple at Jerusalem by one Fulvia, a proselyte of theirs at Rome, in consequence of which the Emperor Tiberius, having been informed of the transaction by the lady"s husband, had banished all the Jews from Rome. Others take the word in a general sense to denote any profanation of sanctity. So Luther, Calvin ("profanatio divinae majestatis"), and Bengel ("sacrilegium committi"s, quia Deo non das gloriam, quae proprie Dei est"). Inasmuch, however, as definite malpractices of the Jews at that time, on account of which the name of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles (ver. 24), seem to be here alluded to, the word may, perhaps more probably, be understood in its proper sense of plundering temples, meaning heathen temples a practice which Jewish zealots, in their professed abhorrence of idolatry, might be addicted to when they had opportunity. A writer, though himself attaching no idea of sanctity to such temples, might still use the current term ierosulein . SO, among the ancients, Chrysostom and Theophylact understand it; the latter, however, limiting it to taking away the anayhmata . He says, "For if they did abhor the idols, yet nevertheless, dominated by covetousness, they touched the idol-offerings for filthy lucre"s sake." In doing this, he seems to imply, they broke the very Law which had enjoined their ancestors to "destroy the altars, and break down the images" of idolaters; (Deu_7:5) for the sauna Law had forbidden them to "desire the silver and gold that is on them," or "take it unto thee, for it is an abomination to the Lord thy God". (Deu_7:25) A strong confirmation of the view that plundering of heathen temples is denoted by ierosuleiv is found in Act_19:37, when the town-clerk of Ephesus defended the Christians against the popular fury by declaring that they were not ierosuloi , that is (as he might mean) not temple-plunderers, such as ordinary Jews had the reputation of being. It has been objected against this view that there is a lack of recorded instances of such temple-plundering on the part of Jews, and that they could not have had much chance, as things then were, of thus displaying their zeal. But there may have been instances, notorious at the time, though not recorded; and, if so, the drift may be, "Thou displayest thy abhorrence of idolatry, enjoined by the Law, by acts of violence and greed, such as the very Law forbids."

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

commit sacrilege

Or, rob temples.

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou rob temples?

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. Commit adultery. In spite of the strictness of their decalogue and moral code, the lax divorce practices of the Jews permitted adultery (Matt. 19:8, 9), and the Talmud says that some of the most celebrated rabbis were guilty of the same sin. See also John 4. Thou that abhorrest idols. The question that follows has caused much discussion. The best rendering is, Dost thou rob temples? or, Are you a temple robber? Schaff suggests that the meaning is as follows: “Dost thou abhor idols, according to thy law, and yet engage in traffic whereby thou makest gain off the temples where this idol worship is practiced?” Macknight says that the reference is to robbing the temple at Jerusalem of what was due it. I think not. The apostles refers to practices which dishonor God among the Gentiles.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

22. ἱεροσυλεῖς. Cf. Act 19:37. S. H. refers to Jos. Antiq. iv. 8, 10; Lft, Supern. Rel. p. 299 f.; Ramsay, Ch. & R. E. p. 144 n.; Deu 7:26. The antithesis is less clear than in the former cases. The charge seems to be that, though they regard idols as ‘abominable’ things, they do not hesitate to make pecuniary advantage out of robbing temples.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. ὁ βδελ. τὰ εἴδ. ἱεροσυλεῖς] The contrast here must be maintained; which it will not be if we understand ἱεροσυλεῖς of robbing the temple of God of offerings destined for him (Jos. Antt. xviii. 3, Antt. xviii.4). And τὰ εἴδωλα leads into the kind of robbery which is meant. Thou who abhorrest idols, dost thou rob their temples? That it was necessary to vindicate Jews from such a charge, appears from Act 19:37: and Jos.Antt. iv. 8.10 gives as a law, μὴ συλᾷν ἱερὰ ξενικά, μηδʼ ἂν ἐπωνομασμένον ᾖ τινι θεῷ κειμήλιον λαμβάνειν.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. βδελυσσόμενος: used of the expression of physical disgust, esp. of the Jew’s horror at idolatry.

Note the piling up of phrases in Deu 7:26 καὶ οὐκ εἰσοίσεις βδέλυγμα [here of the gold and silver plates with which idols were overlaid] εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου, καὶ ἔσῃ ἀνάθημα ὥσπερ τοῦτο, προσοχθίσματι προσοχθιεῖς καὶ βδελύγματι βδελύξῃ, ὅτι ἀνάθημά ἐστιν. Comp. also Dan 12:11; Mat 24:15, &c. One of the ignominies of captivity was to be compelled to carry the idols of the heathen: Assump. Moys. viii. 4 cogentur palam baiulare idola corum inquinata.

ἱεροσυλεῖς. The passage just quoted (Deu 7:26 with 25), Joseph. Ant. IV. viii. 10, and Act 19:37 (where the town-clerk asserts that St. Paul and his companions were ‘not ἱερόσυλοι’) show that the robbery of temples was a charge to which the Jews were open in spite of their professed horror of idol-worship.

There were provisions in the Talmud which expressly guarded against this: everything which had to do with an idol was a βδέλυγμα to him unless it had been previously desecrated by Gentiles. But for this the Jew might have thought that in depriving the heathen of their idol he was doing a good work. See the passages in Delitzsch ad loc.; also on ἱεροσυλία, which must not be interpreted too narrowly, Lft., Ess. on Supern. Rel. p. 299 f.; Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 144 n., where it is noted that ἱεροσυλία was just one of the crimes which a provincial governor could proceed against by his own imperium.

The Eng. Versions of ἱεροσυλεῖς group themselves thus: ‘robbest God of his honour’ Tyn. Cran. Genev.; ‘doest sacrilege’ (or equivalent) Wic. Rhem. AV. RV. marg.; ‘dost rob temples’ RV.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Sayest [λεγων] . The denunciation is not so pronounced. The Talmud charges the crime of adultery upon the three most illustrious Rabbins. Abhorrest [βδελυσσομενος] . The verb means originally to turn away from a thing on account of the stench. See on abomination, Mt 24:15.

Commit sacrilege [ιεροσυλεις] . Rev. renders according to the etymology, iJeron temple, sulaw to despoil; hence rob temples. Some explain, the pillage of idol temples; others, robbing the Jewish temple by embezzlement, withholding the temple tribute, etc. The robbery of temples as practiced by the Jews is inferred from Act 19:37. Compare Josephus, "Antiq.," 4 8, 10, where he lays down the law not to plunder Gentile temples, nor to seize treasure stored up there in honor of any God. 25

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.